Evensons Hallmark Myrons Cards & Gifts ripoff Steve LaPanta sweatshop working conditions for inhumane treatment of their employees Shoreview Minnesota

I would like to share my employment experience working for Evensons Hallmark in Brookings, SD.  I worked at their store for 10 years, most of which was for an amazing manager who had been there for 30+ years.  When she left we all expected change and welcomed their new manager, who was good but couldn't handle working for Neil, and left after less than a year. The next manager we all thought was good but she too decided that the pay was not worth all the expectations and she will be done at the end of this month. I never thought I had done anything wrong, in the history of me working there I had actually been offered the manager job myself, but already have a home business and preferred to keep my Hallmark job part-time. I always work when asked, and quickly became the only other person for a long time who knew how to do the daily reports and deposit.  I took time off my job to cover the managers vacation, when the store moved to a new location, and also many years for the full store inventory.  Now that I don't work for them I can say in all my business management experience I have never seen a more stupid group of owners.  How they manage to keep multiple stores functioning is beyond me.  First of all they don't pay competitive wages, after 30 + years the person who hired me was barely making $12/hour, and all the raises I ever had were voided out when minimum wage went up and everybody else got bumped up to what I was making.  Second, the store, which could be a goldmine in a town with no other gift stores, is filled with cheap giftware and a huge clearance section with broken, damaged, and outdated items.  Most of the time we don't even get the Hallmark items in the national ads.  Last week the owner called me and took me off the schedule because I don't work enough hours, and it costs them too much money to have so many part-time people on the schedule!  What?  Did you say I was born yesterday?  I found out the real reason he let me and another longtime person go is because the new manager couldn't handle the fact that everybody knew more than she did, even though I have never been anything but helpful, and she's done at the end of the month!  Who does that?  Gets rid of everyone who knows how to do everything in the middle of a manager change?  Whatever!  I believe in karma and when all my favorite customers find out what he did, they won't shop there anymore! Who needs to when we can get Hallmark stuff at HyVee and Walmart now?  Seriously the worst people I have ever worked for. 

I am a former manager of an Evenson's Hallmark.  I worked for them for a little over two years and I enjoyed working for them.  The only reason I quit was that I heard the store was closing and I didn't want to wait around and see the store that I had put so much into close it's doors. Yes I was the only person working during the day.  I was never treated inhumanely or worse than a dog.  The store was never that busy, that I could not get away to go to the bathroom.  I also had time between customers to have a lunch break.  Yes, I maybe had to put my food down to wait on customers, but it wasn't a huge deal. It is only common sense that you would not leave the store with customers in the store shopping.  This was all brought up in my interview so either your friend wasn't listening or is clueless.  If your friend indeed had a Dr.'s note, they would have allowed her to have a chair in the store.  I know this from personal experience.  I had a series of health problems that were documented by a physician.  I gave the note to my supervisor and lo and behold, I was allowed to bring a stool in.  This was no means a sweatshop atmosphere and to call it so is simply ridiculous.  I was also paid a decent salary by Evenson's and I am having a hard time finding anything else in town that pays as well.  It is sheer vindictiveness that causes someone to write a letter such as yours.  My town misses it's Hallmark and I miss my job.  I would work for Evenson's again in a heartbeat if they ever opened another store in my area. 

 

A cursory lookup at the Minn. Dept. of Labor & Industry says, "The state law requires employers to provide restroom time and sufficient time to eat a meal. If the break is less than 20 minutes in duration, it must be counted as hours worked. Time to use the nearest restroom must be provided within each four consecutive hours of work. Meal time applies to employees who work eight or more consecutive hours (see Minnesota Statutes 177.253 and 177.254). "

That being said, couldn't the emplyee just put a folding chair somewhere & sit down now & then between customers? Couldn't she just run to the back & go to the restroom real quick in between customers? (I've NEVER seen a Hallmark store that wasn't devoid of customers at least SOME time during the day!) Occasionally at my office I end up by myself due to others having appts., being at lunch, etc. I just run in real quick & go, it's no big deal. I also don't need to GO anywhere during lunch & it's much easier just to eat there. No big deal to me!

It's too bad she & the employer couldn't just come to an amicable agreement. Being manager & only employee of a retail store would naturally require that you pretty much have to do everything & take breaks when you can. Many people like working alone & not having to deal with other people (except customers) & are quite adaptable to that type of situation. I think the older & more experienced you get, the less you make a big deal about every little thing. Or maybe it's the ex-military "teamwork, just get the job done" mentality. If the pay was good, I'd deal with it. Maybe her pay wasn't sufficient in her eyes?

I would have worked with the owners/employer & made suggestions on how they both could be happy. Surely they could've come to an amicable solution so that the employee could take time off sometimes since she had to be there all day every day? The owners could fill in every now & then? (There seemed to be enough names mentioned.) Most companies will be accomodating if you you're a good employee whom they trust & depend upon.

The filer of the report "Evensons Hallmark Myrons Cards & Gifts ripoff Steve LaPanta sweatshop working conditions for inhumane treatment of their employees Shoreview Minnesota" has no legitimate grounds for complaint. There has been no transgression committed.

1.) Eight hour shifts are standard in a full-time job. The cliched "9 to 5" is indeed eight hours if one bothers to count.

2.) If there is no chair, then indeed you must stand. This is standard practice.

3.) It should also be noted that just because it's a break doesn't mean you sit. If you must continue standing on break because there is no place to sit, it still counts as a break. The journalist of the article is pandering for a shock reaction by the clever manipulation of words. The direct quote is "She was not told that the responsibilities of the position would require her to be on her feet with NO BREAKS for up to 8 consecutive hours at a time." That appears to imply that no work breaks were given, but the clever reader will see that it more directly states that there were no breaks from standing. The journalist omitted this part, again for the shock reaction.

4.) Being disallowed to go to the bathroom when customers are present is also a standard practice for security and convenience. What is the customer to think if the only one in the store is nowhere to be found, because they are in the bathroom, when the customer wants to make a purchase? It is also a measure against shoplifting. Having no-one around to watch them, because the only person in the store is in the bathroom, only makes the vice of the shoplifter easier to indulge.

5.) "This is inhumane treatment of human being. (Dogs gets better treatment, since they never have to hold their bladder for more than 4 hours at a time!!!)" is also a frivolous statement, intended only to shock the reader. It is a baseless statement to say that being made to "hold it" is inhumane because "dogs never have to hold their bladder for more than four hours" says who? the journalist? how does the journalist know? what qualifies the journalist to make such broad statements as never?

It is clear that the complainer has little experience in the retail industry, and that the journalist is unprofessional. This article should be pulled until is edited for objectivity.

The filer of the report "Evensons Hallmark Myrons Cards & Gifts ripoff Steve LaPanta sweatshop working conditions for inhumane treatment of their employees Shoreview Minnesota" has no legitimate grounds for complaint. There has been no transgression committed.

1.) Eight hour shifts are standard in a full-time job. The cliched "9 to 5" is indeed eight hours if one bothers to count.

2.) If there is no chair, then indeed you must stand. This is standard practice.

3.) It should also be noted that just because it's a break doesn't mean you sit. If you must continue standing on break because there is no place to sit, it still counts as a break. The journalist of the article is pandering for a shock reaction by the clever manipulation of words. The direct quote is "She was not told that the responsibilities of the position would require her to be on her feet with NO BREAKS for up to 8 consecutive hours at a time." That appears to imply that no work breaks were given, but the clever reader will see that it more directly states that there were no breaks from standing. The journalist omitted this part, again for the shock reaction.

4.) Being disallowed to go to the bathroom when customers are present is also a standard practice for security and convenience. What is the customer to think if the only one in the store is nowhere to be found, because they are in the bathroom, when the customer wants to make a purchase? It is also a measure against shoplifting. Having no-one around to watch them, because the only person in the store is in the bathroom, only makes the vice of the shoplifter easier to indulge.

5.) "This is inhumane treatment of human being. (Dogs gets better treatment, since they never have to hold their bladder for more than 4 hours at a time!!!)" is also a frivolous statement, intended only to shock the reader. It is a baseless statement to say that being made to "hold it" is inhumane because "dogs never have to hold their bladder for more than four hours" says who? the journalist? how does the journalist know? what qualifies the journalist to make such broad statements as never?

It is clear that the complainer has little experience in the retail industry, and that the journalist is unprofessional. This article should be pulled until is edited for objectivity.

The filer of the report "Evensons Hallmark Myrons Cards & Gifts ripoff Steve LaPanta sweatshop working conditions for inhumane treatment of their employees Shoreview Minnesota" has no legitimate grounds for complaint. There has been no transgression committed.

1.) Eight hour shifts are standard in a full-time job. The cliched "9 to 5" is indeed eight hours if one bothers to count.

2.) If there is no chair, then indeed you must stand. This is standard practice.

3.) It should also be noted that just because it's a break doesn't mean you sit. If you must continue standing on break because there is no place to sit, it still counts as a break. The journalist of the article is pandering for a shock reaction by the clever manipulation of words. The direct quote is "She was not told that the responsibilities of the position would require her to be on her feet with NO BREAKS for up to 8 consecutive hours at a time." That appears to imply that no work breaks were given, but the clever reader will see that it more directly states that there were no breaks from standing. The journalist omitted this part, again for the shock reaction.

4.) Being disallowed to go to the bathroom when customers are present is also a standard practice for security and convenience. What is the customer to think if the only one in the store is nowhere to be found, because they are in the bathroom, when the customer wants to make a purchase? It is also a measure against shoplifting. Having no-one around to watch them, because the only person in the store is in the bathroom, only makes the vice of the shoplifter easier to indulge.

5.) "This is inhumane treatment of human being. (Dogs gets better treatment, since they never have to hold their bladder for more than 4 hours at a time!!!)" is also a frivolous statement, intended only to shock the reader. It is a baseless statement to say that being made to "hold it" is inhumane because "dogs never have to hold their bladder for more than four hours" says who? the journalist? how does the journalist know? what qualifies the journalist to make such broad statements as never?

It is clear that the complainer has little experience in the retail industry, and that the journalist is unprofessional. This article should be pulled until is edited for objectivity.

The filer of the report "Evensons Hallmark Myrons Cards & Gifts ripoff Steve LaPanta sweatshop working conditions for inhumane treatment of their employees Shoreview Minnesota" has no legitimate grounds for complaint. There has been no transgression committed.

1.) Eight hour shifts are standard in a full-time job. The cliched "9 to 5" is indeed eight hours if one bothers to count.

2.) If there is no chair, then indeed you must stand. This is standard practice.

3.) It should also be noted that just because it's a break doesn't mean you sit. If you must continue standing on break because there is no place to sit, it still counts as a break. The journalist of the article is pandering for a shock reaction by the clever manipulation of words. The direct quote is "She was not told that the responsibilities of the position would require her to be on her feet with NO BREAKS for up to 8 consecutive hours at a time." That appears to imply that no work breaks were given, but the clever reader will see that it more directly states that there were no breaks from standing. The journalist omitted this part, again for the shock reaction.

4.) Being disallowed to go to the bathroom when customers are present is also a standard practice for security and convenience. What is the customer to think if the only one in the store is nowhere to be found, because they are in the bathroom, when the customer wants to make a purchase? It is also a measure against shoplifting. Having no-one around to watch them, because the only person in the store is in the bathroom, only makes the vice of the shoplifter easier to indulge.

5.) "This is inhumane treatment of human being. (Dogs gets better treatment, since they never have to hold their bladder for more than 4 hours at a time!!!)" is also a frivolous statement, intended only to shock the reader. It is a baseless statement to say that being made to "hold it" is inhumane because "dogs never have to hold their bladder for more than four hours" says who? the journalist? how does the journalist know? what qualifies the journalist to make such broad statements as never?

It is clear that the complainer has little experience in the retail industry, and that the journalist is unprofessional. This article should be pulled until is edited for objectivity.